Fort Worth weekly gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1887-09-16

uONcIeO sJOut Tue Le94slat u4N IKE
/ vultures about dead carcass, while this
bill was under consideration, vigorously
lobbying for its passage, and
You now take shelter behind
the above festure Of the Law, for which l
should properly have credit, as & jlstih-
cation for your acts in having lands in
demand for settlement, and arTaigr me
for 'lsborirg so persistently 70 mar, mu-
tilste and defeat the law while il wss BE-
ing framed"
note your apology that you 'did not
make the law," and that it is simply your
"pginful duty 70 execute it." It is true
you did not make the law, but you will
doubtless admit that you exerted your in
huence to secure its passage, and anyone
who knows anything CT the workings Of g
Texas Legislature, knows how hard
it is to defeat the commissioner
when he sets to work to secure the pas
sage or defeat of land bill. l, in COM
mon with ST interested public, am glad
to learn that you are doing all you can to
secure g speedy and correct classification
and valuation of these lands. Your re
cent visit to the Panhandle is hailed by
our people as the dawn of brighter day
for them, and il is believed that you hsve
seen and learned enough to induce you
to clasp hands with US in trying to secure
an early settlement Of this country IN
preference to leasing il out to Z few cap
italists for perpetual stock ranch.
You mistake the meaning Of
my letter when you say
that you 'must decline to give NE the as
surance demanded, that actual settlers be
allowed to purchase their lands at the
minimum price fixed by the law" Imsde
no such demand. l only suggested that
Hundreds OF good citizens have settled
upon school land in the Panhandle and
other portions of this representative dis
trict, expecting to be permitted TO pur-
chase the same from the state at the mini
mum prices fixed by the law" and that
"they have bona tide settled upon the
land and ought 10 be allowed
to purchase it At the minimum
price " My reasons for making this sug-
gestion are based upon the following
facts and circumstances a great many
Of these settlers went upon their land
two, three and four years ago, some Gs
long as i've and six years ago. At that
time lands were nothing like IS valuable
as at present Scores of these people
have made application to buy and ten
dered the money, but the lands being
wateTed, the land board refused 10 &C
cept their applications. Even now you
can scarcely find an owner of unim-
proved land in this country holding it ut
more than the minimum price fixed by
the law for land Of the same quality.
Admitting, for the sake Of argument,
That values have increased beyond the
state minimum prices because Of the
rapid settlement of the country, are
! these settlers, the vanguard Of CiviliZ3-
ton, VINO have have stood the brunt OF
frontier life, to be charged up with this
difference in values, which is largely Que
to their efforts? This same law which
! you are executing makes this generous
| provis0 for the csttlemen: "That any
/ person or persons who have heretofore
Leased lands from this state at prices
! fixed by the land board and whose leases
are not yet expired, shall have
| their rental for the remainder
of their unexpired term reduced
| to the prices charged under this bill for
| the lease of similar lands" | believe
! you favored the passage of this bill. Why
was there not 6 reduction inside &lso fol
the man with Che hoe? I submit to your
! generosity to say whether or not my sug
! gestion is unreasonable, aud if a demand
would il be unreasonable? l shall not
request or demand Of you to do any &C
not permitted by the law. l have simply
appealed to the executive 80 investigate
the case and enforce the law as it is writ
ten, and not according to "discretion.'
! For l am persuaded from ObServa
ton, that the state has beer
"dlscretioned" out OF millions
OF dollars in the last decade, besides
thousands of good citizens, in the man
agement of these lands.
You boast OF the saving Clsuse you pu
in each Lease, by which you claim that tn,
rights Of settlers who were on the Ianl
on the 4lh CT July are fully protected, anl
that the lease is further made subject t,
future classification, and that the agricul
tural lands will be subject TO sale unde
it, You need not nave done so, because
the law already provides for that emer
gency through my amendment, whicl
came so ne&r being defeated b.
the managers of the bill. An,
with this flourish you triumph
antly ash me if l elieve that leases mad
in this manner will keep out & single set
tier. l answer you that l do so believe
and it seems from the language Of tn
law that the Legislature concurred wit
me in my opinion. (See sections Is an
% Of the land law My belief, however
does not cut figure in this matter. LIE
US again refer to the law. l fully Ggre
with you that "tdis law is the Will Of tn
people, and the Commissioner is theiI
servant" And "the law is wonderful
full and explicit, and you have but to rea
1t carefully" TO know what to do. Sec
ton Is requires that when application
TO lease is made, "the Commissioner,
satisfied that the lands applied fer ar
not in immediate demand for purposes O
actual settlement, and that such land
can be leased without detrimeut 70 n,
public interest, shall notify ire spplican
in writing that his proposition to lease i
accepted" How is the COMMISSIONS
satisfied before accepting the propositiol
to lease? Does he require the supIican
to furnish evidence to satisfy him thst to-
lands applied for care not in immediat
demand for purposes OF actual settle
ment?" or does the Commissioner waiy
the proof and assume that
is not wanted for settlemen
and il you do so assume, by what cours
of reasoning 90 you arrive at such con
clusion? l called upon the Governor il
my letter for construction OF this sec
ton Of the lsw, asserting that the Pan
handle lands were in demand for settle
ment. In your reply you failed to re
spond to this request, but you make thi
important admission: "The necessity 70
having these lands classified is almos
universal throughout the state where ar.